lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: kprobes vs __ex_table[]
Hi Peter,

On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 10:26:46 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> One more complication with __ex_table and optimized kprobes is that we
> need to be careful not to clobber __ex_table[].fixup. It would be very
> bad if the optimized probe were to clobber the address we let the fixup
> return to -- or that needs fixups too, _after_ running
> __ex_table[].handler().

This gave me a chance to read closer current code, and I found that
I made a mistake 5 years ago on kprobe-booster. The commit 464846888d9a
("x86/kprobes: Fix a bug which can modify kernel code permanently")
introduced another bug -- which passed the address of copied instruction
instead of probing address to search_exception_tables() when preparing
kprobe-booster (skips singlestep.)

I'll send a fix patch.

Thank you,

--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-02-28 17:20    [W:0.099 / U:1.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site